Re:Re: About the idea of integrating the CVS and ReviewBoard into a development process
Hi, Scott, I want to know, If we set all those code-review process after code commition, We do post-commit review, Then how to realize that? I had use post-review to generate a post-commit review request for specific files, But failed. My command is: post-review --debug --revision-range=1.1:1.2 --summary=Null --target-people=john -p post-review.c But the out put is: cvs diff -uN -r 1.1 -r1.2 Your review request still exists, but the diff is not attached --- I want to know, Why the post-review has droped my file name parameter? And if I have more then one file to make post-commit review, Then how to specify the revision-range to each of them? Need suggestion! Best Regards! 在2009-12-22，Scott Quesnelle scott.quesne...@gmail.com 写道： We are doing reviews prior to the changes being commited to CVS. To enforce this process, you can modify the CVS pre-commit script. This script can then check change for review approval. We currently require the bugid to be in the cvs commit log, as such we query the bug tracking system and check if the bug is in the review state and has an enclosure containing the review summary. The enclosure gets added to the bug report when the user moves the review request to 'close (submitted)'. CVS doesn't deal well with rolling back changes, and we only want 'good reviewed code' to enter our repository, so do all our reviews prior to commit. Scott 2009/12/20 qhlonline qhlonl...@163.com Hi, all. Our team is now requiring that the code review will be an indispensable step in development. So we want to integrate the Repository with the ReviewBoard server. Then the development process will be: 1、Somebody have developed or have changed some source code of a product. 2、He use cvs add, or then cvs commit command to commit his code. 3、CVS can then generate a Reviewrequest for this code change to RB. Reviewboard will notice the reviewers of the default review groups to make the code review.(The default review group will be where the commitor is in). 4、All reviewers can review those code through web UI, And the code commitor will fix all found bugs and recommit. 5、When all reviewers has admitted that the code is OK， Then the code will automatically commit to the CVS repository. 6、optionally，A notice of code commit success will given to all participants. That is, When the code editor want to commit his code, His code should be firstly reviewed. No truely commit to repository if any reviewer do not accept his code. This process should be forced instead of optional. Then how to realize those function? especially how to integrate CVS with ReviewBoard server? Need suggestions or documents related. Best Regards! -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Re: About the idea of integrating the CVS and ReviewBoard into a development process
I would suggest taking a look at: http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2003/06/05/scripts.html This requires some scripting on your part. Our script queries our bug tracking system (ClearQuest) and validates that the bugid is valid and that the bug is in the correct state (Code Review) and that there exists data in the code review enclosure. Separately, I have made modifications to my install of Reviewboard to generate review summaries when the review is closed as submitted. These summaries are then posted to our bug tracker with another script via cron. Also, separate the idea of doing pre-commit and post-commit reviews from the tool of 'post-review'. That tool in my opinion does not have a good name. It should be something more like generate-review or create-review. The problem is that they are using post not in the sense of pre/post, but in the idea of posting a letter. I made the same mistake as you and assumed that the post-review tool was used to do post-commit reviews by specifying different revisions of files for the review. So the short answer is that there is work that you need to do and it is not built into ReviewBoard, CVS, or bug trackers, but this is the things that need to be done to glue them all together. Scott On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:15 PM, qhlonline qhlonl...@163.com wrote: Thanks for your suggestion, Scott. I am not familar with CVS pre-commit script, And I can not find enough document about RB integrating with Bug Tracker (In ReviewBoard document, I can only know how to set the bugTracker in RB server, But I don't know its function and its usage there), Can you give me more detailed suggestion please? or is there any demo? We are needing the automation of code review process, So it is better to integrate the reviewrequest process into the development process, All developers will not find so much changes in there development process, Except that when they received the Email of review notice, Then need to do the code review. Best Regards! 在2009-12-22，Scott Quesnelle scott.quesne...@gmail.com 写道： We are doing reviews prior to the changes being commited to CVS. To enforce this process, you can modify the CVS pre-commit script. This script can then check change for review approval. We currently require the bugid to be in the cvs commit log, as such we query the bug tracking system and check if the bug is in the review state and has an enclosure containing the review summary. The enclosure gets added to the bug report when the user moves the review request to 'close (submitted)'. CVS doesn't deal well with rolling back changes, and we only want 'good reviewed code' to enter our repository, so do all our reviews prior to commit. Scott 2009/12/20 qhlonline qhlonl...@163.com Hi, all. Our team is now requiring that the code review will be an indispensable step in development. So we want to integrate the Repository with the ReviewBoard server. Then the development process will be: 1、Somebody have developed or have changed some source code of a product. 2、He use cvs add, or then cvs commit command to commit his code. 3、CVS can then generate a Reviewrequest for this code change to RB. Reviewboard will notice the reviewers of the default review groups to make the code review.(The default review group will be where the commitor is in). 4、All reviewers can review those code through web UI, And the code commitor will fix all found bugs and recommit. 5、When all reviewers has admitted that the code is OK， Then the code will automatically commit to the CVS repository. 6、optionally，A notice of code commit success will given to all participants. That is, When the code editor want to commit his code, His code should be firstly reviewed. No truely commit to repository if any reviewer do not accept his code. This process should be forced instead of optional. Then how to realize those function? especially how to integrate CVS with ReviewBoard server? Need suggestions or documents related. Best Regards! -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+ unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let
Re:Re: Re: About the idea of integrating the CVS and ReviewBoard into a development process
Thanks Scott，The method you provided seems doing pre-commit review. But now we have changed our idea. We want do automation on post-commit review. Thus, If somebody has commmited his code, a CVS post-commit script will be stimulated and post a review request for this user. Now the key problem is that: CVS manage each file separately, While the RBTools: post-reiew, has support to make post-commit review on the whole directory. It use the argument of --revision-range. If I had just commited two files to CVS: Afile from V1.1 to V1.2; Bfile from V1.5 to V1.6, Then there will be noway to generate a ReviewRequest for these two files at the same time( Using post-review, It will be required by CVS post-commit script to generate review request). Do you have any suggestion on this problem? Best Regards! 在2009-12-23，Scott Quesnelle scott.quesne...@gmail.com 写道： I would suggest taking a look at: http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2003/06/05/scripts.html This requires some scripting on your part. Our script queries our bug tracking system (ClearQuest) and validates that the bugid is valid and that the bug is in the correct state (Code Review) and that there exists data in the code review enclosure. Separately, I have made modifications to my install of Reviewboard to generate review summaries when the review is closed as submitted. These summaries are then posted to our bug tracker with another script via cron. Also, separate the idea of doing pre-commit and post-commit reviews from the tool of 'post-review'. That tool in my opinion does not have a good name. It should be something more like generate-review or create-review. The problem is that they are using post not in the sense of pre/post, but in the idea of posting a letter. I made the same mistake as you and assumed that the post-review tool was used to do post-commit reviews by specifying different revisions of files for the review. So the short answer is that there is work that you need to do and it is not built into ReviewBoard, CVS, or bug trackers, but this is the things that need to be done to glue them all together. Scott On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:15 PM, qhlonline qhlonl...@163.com wrote: Thanks for your suggestion, Scott. I am not familar with CVS pre-commit script, And I can not find enough document about RB integrating with Bug Tracker (In ReviewBoard document, I can only know how to set the bugTracker in RB server, But I don't know its function and its usage there), Can you give me more detailed suggestion please? or is there any demo? We are needing the automation of code review process, So it is better to integrate the reviewrequest process into the development process, All developers will not find so much changes in there development process, Except that when they received the Email of review notice, Then need to do the code review. Best Regards! 在2009-12-22，Scott Quesnelle scott.quesne...@gmail.com 写道： We are doing reviews prior to the changes being commited to CVS. To enforce this process, you can modify the CVS pre-commit script. This script can then check change for review approval. We currently require the bugid to be in the cvs commit log, as such we query the bug tracking system and check if the bug is in the review state and has an enclosure containing the review summary. The enclosure gets added to the bug report when the user moves the review request to 'close (submitted)'. CVS doesn't deal well with rolling back changes, and we only want 'good reviewed code' to enter our repository, so do all our reviews prior to commit. Scott 2009/12/20 qhlonline qhlonl...@163.com Hi, all. Our team is now requiring that the code review will be an indispensable step in development. So we want to integrate the Repository with the ReviewBoard server. Then the development process will be: 1、Somebody have developed or have changed some source code of a product. 2、He use cvs add, or then cvs commit command to commit his code. 3、CVS can then generate a Reviewrequest for this code change to RB. Reviewboard will notice the reviewers of the default review groups to make the code review.(The default review group will be where the commitor is in). 4、All reviewers can review those code through web UI, And the code commitor will fix all found bugs and recommit. 5、When all reviewers has admitted that the code is OK， Then the code will automatically commit to the CVS repository. 6、optionally，A notice of code commit success will given to all participants. That is, When the code editor want to commit his code, His code should be firstly reviewed. No truely commit to repository if any reviewer do not accept his code. This process should be forced instead of optional. Then how to realize those function? especially how to integrate CVS with ReviewBoard server? Need suggestions or documents related. Best Regards! -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
Re: About the idea of integrating the CVS and ReviewBoard into a development process
We are doing reviews prior to the changes being commited to CVS. To enforce this process, you can modify the CVS pre-commit script. This script can then check change for review approval. We currently require the bugid to be in the cvs commit log, as such we query the bug tracking system and check if the bug is in the review state and has an enclosure containing the review summary. The enclosure gets added to the bug report when the user moves the review request to 'close (submitted)'. CVS doesn't deal well with rolling back changes, and we only want 'good reviewed code' to enter our repository, so do all our reviews prior to commit. Scott 2009/12/20 qhlonline qhlonl...@163.com Hi, all. Our team is now requiring that the code review will be an indispensable step in development. So we want to integrate the Repository with the ReviewBoard server. Then the development process will be: 1、Somebody have developed or have changed some source code of a product. 2、He use cvs add, or then cvs commit command to commit his code. 3、CVS can then generate a Reviewrequest for this code change to RB. Reviewboard will notice the reviewers of the default review groups to make the code review.(The default review group will be where the commitor is in). 4、All reviewers can review those code through web UI, And the code commitor will fix all found bugs and recommit. 5、When all reviewers has admitted that the code is OK， Then the code will automatically commit to the CVS repository. 6、optionally，A notice of code commit success will given to all participants. That is, When the code editor want to commit his code, His code should be firstly reviewed. No truely commit to repository if any reviewer do not accept his code. This process should be forced instead of optional. Then how to realize those function? especially how to integrate CVS with ReviewBoard server? Need suggestions or documents related. Best Regards! -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re:Re: About the idea of integrating the CVS and ReviewBoard into a development process
Thanks for your suggestion, Scott. I am not familar with CVS pre-commit script, And I can not find enough document about RB integrating with Bug Tracker (In ReviewBoard document, I can only know how to set the bugTracker in RB server, But I don't know its function and its usage there), Can you give me more detailed suggestion please? or is there any demo? We are needing the automation of code review process, So it is better to integrate the reviewrequest process into the development process, All developers will not find so much changes in there development process, Except that when they received the Email of review notice, Then need to do the code review. Best Regards! 在2009-12-22，Scott Quesnelle scott.quesne...@gmail.com 写道： We are doing reviews prior to the changes being commited to CVS. To enforce this process, you can modify the CVS pre-commit script. This script can then check change for review approval. We currently require the bugid to be in the cvs commit log, as such we query the bug tracking system and check if the bug is in the review state and has an enclosure containing the review summary. The enclosure gets added to the bug report when the user moves the review request to 'close (submitted)'. CVS doesn't deal well with rolling back changes, and we only want 'good reviewed code' to enter our repository, so do all our reviews prior to commit. Scott 2009/12/20 qhlonline qhlonl...@163.com Hi, all. Our team is now requiring that the code review will be an indispensable step in development. So we want to integrate the Repository with the ReviewBoard server. Then the development process will be: 1、Somebody have developed or have changed some source code of a product. 2、He use cvs add, or then cvs commit command to commit his code. 3、CVS can then generate a Reviewrequest for this code change to RB. Reviewboard will notice the reviewers of the default review groups to make the code review.(The default review group will be where the commitor is in). 4、All reviewers can review those code through web UI, And the code commitor will fix all found bugs and recommit. 5、When all reviewers has admitted that the code is OK， Then the code will automatically commit to the CVS repository. 6、optionally，A notice of code commit success will given to all participants. That is, When the code editor want to commit his code, His code should be firstly reviewed. No truely commit to repository if any reviewer do not accept his code. This process should be forced instead of optional. Then how to realize those function? especially how to integrate CVS with ReviewBoard server? Need suggestions or documents related. Best Regards! -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
